DOCSLIB.ORG

Wildlife Protection Guidelines for Alaska

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wildlife Protection Guidelines for Alaska Wildlife Protection Guidelines for Alaska Alaska Regional Response Team, Wildlife Protection Committee Revision 5 – August 2012 2018 Administrative Update Revision 5 – August 2012 Administrative Update: March 2018 1 Table of Contents I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... G-5 A. Background G-5 B. Objectives ........................................................................................................................... G-5 C. Scope of Wildlife Protection Guidelines for Alaska ............................................................... G-6 1. Geographic Area ............................................................................................................. G-6 2. Wildlife Resources .......................................................................................................... G-8 3. Wildlife Resource Agencies ............................................................................................. G-8 D. Committee Organization and Development of Guidelines ................................................... G-8 1. Committee Organization ................................................................................................. G-8 2. Development of Guidelines ............................................................................................ G-9 E. Relationship to National Planning Requirements and Guidance .......................................... G-9 F. Procedures for Revisions and Updates................................................................................ G-10 II. Response Activities .................................................................................................................... G-11 A. Wildlife Resource Agency Notification and Input ............................................................... G-11 B. Wildlife Response Strategies ............................................................................................... G-11 1. Primary Response Strategies ........................................................................................ G-11 2. Secondary Response Strategies .................................................................................... G-12 a. Deterrence Activities .............................................................................................. G-13 b. Pre-Emptive Capture .............................................................................................. G-13 3. Tertiary Response Strategies ........................................................................................ G-14 C. General Wildlife Protection Considerations ........................................................................ G-15 1. Prevention of Introduction of Rats to “Rat Free” Islands ............................................. G-15 2. Prevention of Unnecessary or Illegal Disturbance to Sensitive Species and Habitats .. G-16 3. Prevention of Potential Injury and/or Disturbance to Bears ........................................ G-18 4. Prevention of the Collection of Wildlife Parts for Personal Use ................................... G-18 5. Prevention of Wildlife Exposure to Shoreline Treatment Chemicals ........................... G-18 D. Funding G-18 Figures Figure 1 Subarea Contingency Plan Boundaries ................................................................................ G-7 Revision 5 – August 2012 Wildlife Protection Guidelines for Alaska Administrative Update: March 2018 2 Appendices Appendix 1: Wildlife Resource Agency Considerations for Pre-Emptive Capture of Unoiled Wildlife and/or Capture and Rehabilitation of Oiled Wildlife .............................................................................. G-19 Appendix 2 Species of Concern by Subarea: Migratory Birds .................................................... G-21 Appendix 3: Species of Concern by Subarea: Marine Mammals ................................................. G-27 Appendix 4 Species of Concern by Subarea: Terrestrial Mammals ............................................ G-31 Appendix 5: [No Longer Used] ..................................................................................................... G-33 Appendix 6 Wildlife Protection Information: Migratory Birds .................................................. G-35 Appendix 7 Wildlife Protection Information: Marine Mammals ............................................... G-43 Appendix 8 Wildlife Protection Information: Terrestrial Mammals .......................................... G-77 Appendix 9 Example of Wildlife Protection Advisory for Response-Related Aircraft and Vessel Traffic and the News Media .................................................................................................................. G-105 Appendix 10 Example of Information Bulletin on Prohibitions on the Collection of Wildlife Parts . G- 107 Appendix 11 Carcass Collection Guidelines ................................................................................ G-109 Appendix 12 Capture Forms: Live Oiled Wildlife ....................................................................... G-127 Appendix 13 Checklist of Suggested On-Scene Wildlife Response-Related Activities for Wildlife Resource Agency Representatives ........................................................... G-135 Appendix 14 Checklist of Suggested Office Equipment, Supplies, and Documents for Wildlife Resource Agency Representatives to Take On-Scene ............................................................. G-137 Appendix 15 Wildlife Resource Agency Permits and/or Authorizations Required for Deterring, Collecting or Holding Live Animals1 ...................................................... G-139 Appendix 16 Equipment and Materials Suggested for Deterrence Kit: Unoiled Migratory Birds ........................................................................................ G-141 Appendix 17 Equipment and Materials Required for Capture/Stabilization Kits: Oiled Migratory Birds1 ...................................................................................................................... G-143 Appendix 18 Equipment and Materials Required for Stabilization Modules: Oiled Migratory Birds .... G- 145 Appendix 19 Equipment Used Capturing, Handling, and Rehabilitating Oiled .................................... Revision 5 – August 2012 Wildlife Protection Guidelines for Alaska Administrative Update: March 2018 3 Sea Otters .............................................................................................................. G-147 Appendix 20 Entities in Alaska with Equipment and Materials Stockpiled for Deterring Unoiled Migratory Birds, Capturing and Rehabilitating Oiled Migratory Birds and Sea Otters, and Holding Polar Bears......................................................................................... G-155 Appendix 21 Facility Requirements for Oiled Wildlife Rehabilitation: Migratory Birds ............. G-163 Appendix 22 Guidance for Facility Requirements for Oiled Wildlife Rehabilitation: Sea Otters ..... G- 167 Appendix 23 Equipment List and Facility Criteria for Handling, Care, and Rehabilitation: Marine Mammals ............................................................................................................... G-169 Appendix 24 Approval Request Form: Unoiled Wildlife Deterrence Activities* ........................ G-171 Appendix 25 Approval Request Form: Pre-Emptive Capture of Unoiled Wildlife and/or Capture and Rehabilitation of Oiled Wildlife1 ....................................................... G-179 Appendix 26 Contact Information for Wildlife Resource Agencies: Migratory Birds, Marine Mammals, and Terrestrial Mammals..................................................................... G-189 Revision 5 – August 2012 Wildlife Protection Guidelines for Alaska Administrative Update: March 2018 4 I. INTRODUCTION A. BACKGROUND The coastline of Alaska and its offshore areas provide seasonal feeding, breeding, reproducing, and staging grounds for large numbers of migratory birds and marine and terrestrial mammals. In some cases, the major portion of the world's population of a particular species may be present. Moreover, these wildlife populations include important subsistence resources. Because of their interdependence with the marine environment, during an oil spill that affects offshore or coastal areas, wildlife can contact oil on the water surface and/or along shorelines, marshes, or tide lands. The number of individuals and species affected will depend on several variables, such as the location and size of the spill, the characteristics of the oil, weather and water conditions, types of habitats affected, and the time of year the spill occurs. In 1987, the Alaska Regional Response Team (RRT) recognized that guidance for dealing with oiled wildlife was not specifically provided in either the National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) or the Alaska Region Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (Alaska Region Contingency Plan). At the request of the Alaska RRT Co-Chairs, a working group was established in September 1987 to develop guidelines that Federal On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) could use during a federally-funded oil spill response. B. OBJECTIVES Initially, the objectives of the working group focused on developing guidelines for capturing and treating oiled wildlife. As information relative to the guidelines was
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Southwest Alaska Salmon Habitat Partnership Strategic Plan (2017)
    Southwest Alaska Salmon Habitat Partnership Strategic Conservation Action Plan for Southwest Alaska Watersheds 2017 Update Preface In studying the history of the decline of the salmon runs of the Pacific Coast, it is striking to notice how invariably these declines are blamed on over-fishing. These statements come most often from those least acquainted with the subject and are frequently made to cover up other causes, which may be of their own making. While it is true that over-fishing is responsible for many declines, there is evidence to show that in numerous cases it is of minor or no consequence. The actual reasons are often found to be changes in the environment of the salmon due to natural and unnatural (man-made) conditions. This is especially true of the fresh water stages of its existence. Many examples could be cited. Some of the natural ones are cyclic climatic changes, floods, droughts, freezes, earthquakes, earth slides, beaver dams and increase in predators. On the other hand there are such man-made, or unnatural, causes as deforestation due to logging; hydro-electric, irrigation, flood control, and navigation projects; pollution, especially from pulp mills; soil conservation and reclamation schemes; gravel washing and mining operations; road construction such as stream culverts; insect control using poisonous sprays; and many others. The listing of these does not necessarily mean that all are inimical to the continuation of our salmon fisheries. It does mean, however, that if such projects are improperly and unwisely planned, the results will be disastrous to our fisheries. Alaska needs new industries, but not at the expense of her most important resource, which if properly cared for, will produce year after year.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Park Science 19(1): Arctic Alaska Are Living at the Species’ Northern-Most to Identify Habitats Most Frequented by Bears and 4-9
    National Park Service US Department of the Interior Alaska Park Science Region 11, Alaska Below the Surface Fish and Our Changing Underwater World Volume 19, Issue 1 Noatak National Preserve Cape Krusenstern Gates of the Arctic Alaska Park Science National Monument National Park and Preserve Kobuk Valley Volume 19, Issue 1 National Park June 2020 Bering Land Bridge Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve National Preserve Denali National Wrangell-St Elias National Editorial Board: Park and Preserve Park and Preserve Leigh Welling Debora Cooper Grant Hilderbrand Klondike Gold Rush Jim Lawler Lake Clark National National Historical Park Jennifer Pederson Weinberger Park and Preserve Guest Editor: Carol Ann Woody Kenai Fjords Managing Editor: Nina Chambers Katmai National Glacier Bay National National Park Design: Nina Chambers Park and Preserve Park and Preserve Sitka National A special thanks to Sarah Apsens for her diligent Historical Park efforts in assembling articles for this issue. Her Aniakchak National efforts helped make this issue possible. Monument and Preserve Alaska Park Science is the semi-annual science journal of the National Park Service Alaska Region. Each issue highlights research and scholarship important to the stewardship of Alaska’s parks. Publication in Alaska Park Science does not signify that the contents reflect the views or policies of the National Park Service, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute National Park Service endorsement or recommendation. Alaska Park Science is found online at https://www.nps.gov/subjects/alaskaparkscience/index.htm Table of Contents Below the Surface: Fish and Our Changing Environmental DNA: An Emerging Tool for Permafrost Carbon in Stream Food Webs of Underwater World Understanding Aquatic Biodiversity Arctic Alaska C.
    [Show full text]
  • Designation of Critical Habitat for the Southwest Alaska Distinct Population Segment of the Northern Sea Otter; Final Rule
    Thursday, October 8, 2009 Part III Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Southwest Alaska Distinct Population Segment of the Northern Sea Otter; Final Rule VerDate Nov<24>2008 19:03 Oct 07, 2009 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\08OCR3.SGM 08OCR3 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3 51988 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 194 / Thursday, October 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR northern sea otter, refer to the final published in the Federal Register on listing rule published in the Federal August 9, 2005 (70 FR 46366). Fish and Wildlife Service Register on August 9, 2005 (70 FR Summary of Comments and 46366), the proposed rule to designate Recommendations 50 CFR Part 17 critical habitat published in the Federal Register on December 16, 2008 (73 FR We requested written comments from [FWS–R7–ES–2008–0105; 92210–1117– the public during the public comment 0000–FY08–B4] 76454), and the June 9, 2009 (74 FR 27271), notice of availability of the draft period on the proposed rule to designate RIN 1018–AV92 economic analysis (DEA). More detailed critical habitat for the southwest Alaska information on northern sea otter DPS of the northern sea otter. During the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife biology and ecology that is directly public comment period, we also and Plants; Designation of Critical relevant to designation of critical habitat contacted appropriate Federal, State, Habitat for the Southwest Alaska is discussed under the Primary and local agencies; Alaska Native Distinct Population Segment of the Constituent Elements section below.
    [Show full text]
  • Moose Hunters in - Southwest Alaska a Better Opportunity to Evaluate Antlers
    280 AN EVALUATION OF TROPHY MOOSE MANAGEMENT ON THE ALASKA PENINSULA Christian A. Smith, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, King Salmon, Alaska James B. Faro, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Anchorage, Alaska Nicholas C. Steen, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, King Salmon, Alaska '" Abstract: an experimental trophy management program was initiated on the Alaska Peninsula in 1976 with the imple­ mentation of a regulation requiring that all harvested bull moose (AZaes aZaes gigas) have antlers with at least a 50 inch spread. The regulation was designed to protect bulls under 5 years of age, to test the capability of hunters to comply with minimum size requirements, and to determine the potential for maintaining trophy class bulls in the population through this approach. The first two objectives have been accomplished. Nearly 70 - percent of the harvested bulls have been 5 or more years old and only 4 percent of the bulls taken were illegal. Adequate survey data are not available to determine current proportions of trophy bulls in the herd. In view of the declining nature of the population and increasing frequency - of 5 year olds in the kill, however, it seems likely that current harvests may be curtailing recruitment beyond age 5. Although this may not further affect average trophy size, availability of trophy class animals could eventually be - limited to the size of the 5 year old cohort. The moose population of the central Alaska Peninsula, Game Management - Unit 9E, appears to have established via i11111igration southwest from the Naknek River drainage in the early 1930's (Faro 1969).
    [Show full text]
  • Article Is Available On- Rise Derived from Satellite Imagery, Nat
    The Cryosphere, 15, 1845–1862, 2021 https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-1845-2021 © Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Spatially and temporally resolved ice loss in High Mountain Asia and the Gulf of Alaska observed by CryoSat-2 swath altimetry between 2010 and 2019 Livia Jakob1, Noel Gourmelen1,2,3, Martin Ewart1, and Stephen Plummer4 1Earthwave Ltd, Edinburgh, EH9 3HJ, UK 2School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH8 9XP, UK 3IPGS UMR 7516, Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, Strasbourg, 67000, France 4European Space Agency, ESA-ESTEC, Noordwijk, 2201 AZ, the Netherlands Correspondence: Livia Jakob ([email protected]) Received: 25 June 2020 – Discussion started: 27 July 2020 Revised: 23 February 2021 – Accepted: 26 February 2021 – Published: 14 April 2021 Abstract. Glaciers are currently the largest contributor to sea HMA ice loss is sustained until 2015–2016, with a slight de- level rise after ocean thermal expansion, contributing ∼ 30 % crease in mass loss from 2016, with some evidence of mass to the sea level budget. Global monitoring of these regions gain locally from 2016–2017 onwards. remains a challenging task since global estimates rely on a variety of observations and models to achieve the required spatial and temporal coverage, and significant differences re- main between current estimates. Here we report the first ap- 1 Introduction plication of a novel approach to retrieve spatially resolved elevation and mass change from radar altimetry over entire Glaciers store less than 1 % of the mass (Farinotti et al., 2019) mountain glaciers areas. We apply interferometric swath al- and occupy just over 4 % of the area (RGI Consortium, 2017) timetry to CryoSat-2 data acquired between 2010 and 2019 of global land ice; however their rapid rate of mass loss has over High Mountain Asia (HMA) and in the Gulf of Alaska accounted for almost a third of the global sea level rise dur- (GoA).
    [Show full text]
  • Spanning the Bering Strait
    National Park service shared beringian heritage Program U.s. Department of the interior Spanning the Bering Strait 20 years of collaborative research s U b s i s t e N c e h UN t e r i N c h UK o t K a , r U s s i a i N t r o DU c t i o N cean Arctic O N O R T H E L A Chu a e S T kchi Se n R A LASKA a SIBERIA er U C h v u B R i k R S otk S a e i a P v I A en r e m in i n USA r y s M l u l g o a a S K S ew la c ard Peninsu r k t e e r Riv n a n z uko i i Y e t R i v e r ering Sea la B u s n i CANADA n e P la u a ns k ni t Pe a ka N h las c A lf of Alaska m u a G K W E 0 250 500 Pacific Ocean miles S USA The Shared Beringian Heritage Program has been fortunate enough to have had a sustained source of funds to support 3 community based projects and research since its creation in 1991. Presidents George H.W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev expanded their cooperation in the field of environmental protection and the study of global change to create the Shared Beringian Heritage Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Ecotone Dynamics in Southwest Alaska During the Late Quaternary Linda B
    Quaternary Science Reviews 20 (2001) 175}188 Vegetation ecotone dynamics in Southwest Alaska during the Late Quaternary Linda B. Brubaker! *, Patricia M. Anderson", Feng Sheng Hu# !College of Forest Resources, University of Washington Box 352100, Seattle WA 98195, USA "Quaternary Research Center, University of Washington Box 351360, Seattle WA 98195, USA #Department of Plant Biology, University of Illinois, Urbana IL 61801, USA Abstract To examine Late Quaternary vegetation change across the modern vegetation gradient from continuous boreal forest (central Alaska) to Betula shrub tundra (Bristol Bay region), pollen records from Idavain and Snipe Lakes are described and compared to those of four other sites in southwest Alaska. Major features of the vegetation history at Idavain Lake include herb-dominated tundra (ca. 14}12 ka BP), mixed herb/Betula shrub tundra (ca. 12}8 ka BP), and Alnus/Betula shrub tundra (8 ka BP to present). The Snipe Lake record reveals a brief period of herb tundra ('12 ka BP), Betula shrub tundra (ca. 12}8.5 ka BP), and Picea forest mixed with Alnus/Betula shrub tundra (ca. 8 ka BP to present). Comparisons with other pollen records indicate that southwest Alaska has been the location of major vegetation ecotones throughout the last 12 ka years. Northern areas have consistently been dominated by larger growth forms (shrubs or trees) than have southern areas. During the Betula period (12}8 ka BP), a dense Betula shrubland occupied central Alaska, changing to a mixed low-Betula shrub and herb tundra in the south. In the Alnus/Picea period (8 ka BP to present), Picea and Betula trees were more common to the north; Alnus and Betula shrubs more abundant to the south.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulatory Impacts on a Yup'ik Fish Camp in Southwest Alaska
    Regulatory Impacts on a Yup’ik Fish Camp in Southwest Alaska by Jory Stariwat B.A., University of Alaska, Anchorage, 2008 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Anthropology) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) AUGUST 2016 © Jory Stariwat, 2016 Abstract Yup’ik fishers on the Nushagak River of Southwest Alaska harvest salmon for both subsistence and commercial purposes, however their cultural protocol and formal resource management principles are unrecognized by the State of Alaska. Drawing from two summers of ethnographic research and experience as an Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) anthropologist, I examine one state regulation preventing drift gillnetting for subsistence purposes. The analysis reveals that the Alaska Department of Fish & Game is currently preventing cultural adaptation on the Nushagak River despite Yup’ik communities maintaining sustainable harvest levels for millennia. Changes in river conditions, namely the location of sandbars and channels, in addition to warming water temperatures, necessitate the application of the traditional harvest method, drift gillnetting, to meet the harvest goals of Yup’ik fishers at the Lewis Point fish camp on the Nushagak River. The Alaska Board of Fisheries has maintained that drifting only be employed in the commercial fishery, not the subsistence fishery, despite policy dictating a subsistence priority over other consumptive uses. While failing to meet the subsistence priority codified in its own policy, the State of Alaska also fails to provide a meaningful role to the tribes in the decision-making domain of resource management.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fur Trade
    Meeting of Frontiers Alaska Teaching Unit: The Alaskan Fur Trade Roger Pearson Alaska Geographic Alliance Institute of the North Anchorage, AK Overview: The eastward expansion of the Russian empire into Siberia and America was integrally linked to the fur trade. By the mid-1600’s the Siberian fur trade accounted for approximately 10 percent of Russia’s total revenue. Exploitation of resources, not sustained yield, dominated resource extraction. Consequently, new areas and new resources were constantly needed. Russian America and the sea otter became the easternmost great fur resource frontier for Imperial Russia. This unit utilizes comparative tables, statistical data, maps, original documents, and images to allow students to develop their own impressions of the Russian American fur trade and its impact on the people and landscape. Standards: Geography Standards: Geography 1. Students will use maps and other geographic representations, tools, and technologies to acquire, process, and report information from a spatial perspective. Geography 17. Students will apply geography to interpret the past. Geographic Skills: • Asking geographic Questions • Acquiring geographic information • Organizing geographic information • Analyzing geographic information • Answering geographic questions Historical Thinking Standards: 2. Historical Comprehension: F. Utilize visual and mathematical data presented in charts, tables, pie and bar graphs, flow charts, Venn diagrams, and other graphic organizers. 4. Historical Analysis and Interpretation: C. Interrogate
    [Show full text]
  • The Newsletter of Alaska Peninsula Corporation
    SPECIAL EDITIO VOLUME 2, ISSUE The Newsletter of Alaska Peninsula Corporation Inside This Issue Chairman’s Report 2 CEO Report 3 APC Federal Report 4 Corporate President Appointed 6 Coronavirus Now Here 7 APC Shareholder Distribution 10 Shareholder Spotlight 11 APC Summer Shareholder Employment 12 Job Opportunities 12 Chairman’s Report When we first sat down to write our submissions for this edition of the newsletter, we were preparing to “These are very announce some surprise developments uncertain times for within the corporation. Information to all. Through that, include a record year of production, shareholder job opportunities, the we are confident planning for a distribution, and that our effort to developing summer projects in villages. create a sustainable, Although the mood of this good news now seems clouded by the uncertainties strong corporation of the Coronavirus pandemic, the over the last few Corporation must continue to somehow years will prevail.” forge on. It’s a difficult reality to work through, however. Many of us whose parents or grandparents survived the pandemic of 1918, vividly recall the stories of entire villages wiped from the Trefon Angasan, Chairman face of the earth in just a few short of the Board weeks-time. Many children became orphaned, stories of the territorial system separating loved ones from one another, sometimes never seeing their family or homelands ever again. For many of us, COVID-19 resurrects those images of an apocalyptic world drawn forth by a rapid acting lethal virus. History repeats itself it seems. These are very uncertain times for all. Through that, we are confident that our effort to create a sustainable, strong corporation over the last few years will prevail.
    [Show full text]
  • Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation Tara Sweeney 6000 Kanakanak Road P.O
    Via email: [email protected] July 25, 2018 Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation Tara Sweeney 6000 Kanakanak Road P.O. Box 130 Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs Dillingham, AK 99576 (907) 842-5201 Department ofthe Interior (800) 478-5201 1849 C Street NW, MS-4141 FAX (907) 842-9354 www.bbahc.org Washington DC 20240 Attn: Mr. Tyler Fish, Counselor Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation is a tribal organization Re: Comments for Consultation on Organization under Alaska representing 28 villages in Southwest Alaska: Amendment to IRA Aleknagik - Dear Assistant Secretary Sweeney: Chignik- Bay Chignik- Lagoon I am writing on behalf of the Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation Chignik- Lake (BBAHC) to submit comments in response to the Department ofthe Interior's (Department) July 2, 2018 Dear Tribal Leader Letter concerning how the Clark's Point - Department might better implement the organization and federal recognition Dillingham- provision ofthe Alaska amendment to the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA). Egegik- Attached is a legal memorandum answering your questions in detail and Ekuk- discussing the parameters ofthe common bond standard. Ekwok - BBAHC was created in 1973 to provide health care services to Alaska Goodnews- Bay Natives of Southwest Alaska. BBAHC began operating and managing the lvanof- Bay Kanakanak Hospital and the Bristol Bay.Service Unit for the Indian Health Kanatak- Service in 1980, and it was the first tribal organization to do so under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. BBAHC is responsible for King Salmon providing health care to the people of28 Alaska Native Villages. Knugank- Koliganek BBAHC has provided support and assistance to our member village, the Levelock- Knugank Tribe, located near Dillingham, Alaska, in its request to the Department to organize under the standard set forth in the Alaska amendment to the IRA and Manokotak - thereby receive federal recognition.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Peninsula Becharof National Wildlife Refuges
    Fishery Management Plan ALASKA PENINSULA BECHAROF NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES July 1994 Region 7 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Department of the Interior FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN ALASKA PENINSULA AND BECHAROF NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES Fiscal Years 1994 - 1998 Prepared By: King Salmon Fishery Resource Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 277 King Salmon, Alaska 99613 May 1994 SUMMARY STATEMENT The Alaska Peninsula and Becharof National Wildlife Refuges Fishery Management Plan (Plan) provides the management direction necessary to ensure conservation of fishery resources and habitat. In addition, the Plan provides for continued use of fishery resources by subsistence, commercial, and recreational users consistent with the purposes for which the Alaska Peninsula and Becharof refuges (Complex) were established and are managed. The Complex's biological and physical environment is described and fishery resources, human use, management history, and major issues and concerns are discussed. This information was obtained from the Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plans, a literature search, and discussions with Alaska Department of Fish and Game personnel. Objectives and tasks are developed to address the issues and concerns. Federal tasks are assigned priorities and costs for each year of continuation. The Plan encompasses a five year period, at which time it will be revised. Major issues and concerns identified include the following: competition between user groups; incomplete salmon escapement data bases to refine management of the Complex fish populations; and inadequate fishery law enforcement. In some cases, concerns were identified because of the perception that they would develop into serious problems if current levels of use or consumption were allowed to continue or expand.
    [Show full text]